How is the matchmaking points calculated? Is it even possible to climb league after playing like 200 games in a season?

When I was under 100 games, I was getting ~ 100 points atleast for wins. Now I have played ~ 500 games, & on nan average I get like ~ 30 points for wins. I play a lot better now compared to my first 200 games, still I am not climbing leaderboard, whereas early season I was climbing like 1k ranks in a day.

Also losses used to deduct a lot less when I had lesser matches. I just want to understand how this system works.

_________________Justice or Just Ice?

eddster27

Post subject: Re: Leaderboard questions

Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:14 pm

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:11 pmPosts: 1359Location: A bunker in prep for the first AI war

The rating calc uses a number of factors but the ones that have the biggest impact are:

Rating is fairly self-explanatory. If you have a higher rating compared to others in the game you probably won't get much for winning. This is because the system expects you to win. Same applies to your team's rating compared to the enemy team's rating. You gain more rating for winning games the system doesn't expect you to win.

The thing you want to know about is certainty. Certainty represents how accurate the system thinks your rating is. Your certainty increases the more games you play. The higher your certainty is, the less rating you tend to gain or lose per game.Generally speaking, this does make players hover around the rating that they should be at long term.

Certainty also plays into what I mentioned with the expectation of the match too. If you have a high certainty and the game expects you to win and you lose, then you are likely to lose a lot more rating.

It's also noteworthy that at higher ratings you will need to maintain a much higher win rate just to stay where you are (which makes sense). If the game expects you to win 70% of your matches because generally speaking your team's rating is higher than the enemy in 70% of the games then you would need to win 7 games for every 3 wins to maintain where you are. Obviously, it doesn't 100% work like that but as a general rule it seems to apply (see top 20 players with lots of games in the season all having high win rates). Mine is comparatively low but that's because I almost exclusively soloq so the games I lose tend to be against premades that are expected to win so I hardly lose any rating for losing.

Climbing is all about winning the games you are expected to win and winning some of the games you aren't expected to win.

Rating is fairly self-explanatory. If you have a higher rating compared to others in the game you probably won't get much for winning. This is because the system expects you to win. Same applies to your team's rating compared to the enemy team's rating. You gain more rating for winning games the system doesn't expect you to win.

The thing you want to know about is certainty. Certainty represents how accurate the system thinks your rating is. Your certainty increases the more games you play. The higher your certainty is, the less rating you tend to gain or lose per game.Generally speaking, this does make players hover around the rating that they should be at long term.

Certainty also plays into what I mentioned with the expectation of the match too. If you have a high certainty and the game expects you to win and you lose, then you are likely to lose a lot more rating.

It's also noteworthy that at higher ratings you will need to maintain a much higher win rate just to stay where you are (which makes sense). If the game expects you to win 70% of your matches because generally speaking your team's rating is higher than the enemy in 70% of the games then you would need to win 7 games for every 3 wins to maintain where you are. Obviously, it doesn't 100% work like that but as a general rule it seems to apply (see top 20 players with lots of games in the season all having high win rates). Mine is comparatively low but that's because I almost exclusively soloq so the games I lose tend to be against premades that are expected to win so I hardly lose any rating for losing.

Climbing is all about winning the games you are expected to win and winning some of the games you aren't expected to win.

Thank you for explaining. I guess this is why I don't get points during day time. I am only league 5, and still hardly get 50 points any game if I play during day.

I had 1 more question, is it possible to check what upgrades the nauts have while watching a replay or a live game?

_________________Justice or Just Ice?

eddster27

Post subject: Re: Leaderboard questions

Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2018 9:03 pm

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:11 pmPosts: 1359Location: A bunker in prep for the first AI war

Climbing is all about winning the games you are expected to win and winning some of the games you aren't expected to win.

What if the system doesn't give me any "expected to win" games at all? I'm currently (last 50 or so games) at about 10-15% winrate but still stuck at relatively high rank because I lose less and less points per match but get a lot whenever someone carries that 2v3 nonsense. Can I make it more consistent? Like dropping rank significantly or something?Personally I'm interested in 50% winrate, not in climbing, but the system seems to fail defining my spot.

I can't imagine a universe where S&S is worth putting more energy into than Awesomenauts

arghyad1

Post subject: Re: Leaderboard questions

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:46 am

Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:47 pmPosts: 24

ScR wrote:

eddster27 wrote:

Climbing is all about winning the games you are expected to win and winning some of the games you aren't expected to win.

What if the system doesn't give me any "expected to win" games at all? I'm currently (last 50 or so games) at about 10-15% winrate but still stuck at relatively high rank because I lose less and less points per match but get a lot whenever someone carries that 2v3 nonsense. Can I make it more consistent? Like dropping rank significantly or something?Personally I'm interested in 50% winrate, not in climbing, but the system seems to fail defining my spot.

Your problem might be coz of less active players. I have seen high ranked players constantly getting unfair match-ups in other games as well, only coz there wouldn't be enough similar ranked players queueing at that time.

But I also don't get this expentency thing. Today I won a lonestar game. I am ~ rank 4k, had teammates ~ rank 7k & ~ 11k. Opponents also had 1 4k rank, & 2 other lower ranks (I don't remember exactly) but the total rank on both sides were equal. I ended with 4-2-0 & ~ 22k tower damage. I got only 9 points for that. Also, neither of the 2 others on my team had played more than 20 games this season (I forgot opponents' games though). So, judging by the points I got, we were highly outmatching our opponents, but I don't really understand the explanation.

_________________Justice or Just Ice?

ScR

Post subject: Re: Leaderboard questions

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2018 10:14 am

Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 10:11 amPosts: 414Location: Mordor

arghyad1 wrote:

but the total rank on both sides were equal

Yes, but this rule applies to points, not ranks. And yes, the sums are usually equal. But I get these:

so... I was just asking is there a way to maybe avoid that nonsense by manipulating my rank some way.

In theory, you could premade with some very low ranked allies, get some very low ranked opponents, and lose. I don't think anyone present would appreciate the game being thrown, though.

Why would I do that? Besides there's a much easier method by simply quitting near the end of the match (or at the very beginning if you're a douche) to drop ranks even faster.My question was "would that help", not "how to screw up my rank".